RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN
Neeraj Raidas – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard Shri Alok Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Rajnish Kumar Verma, learned A.G.A., however, no one has appeared on behalf of the informant/ complainant.
2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 02.05.2022 in Case Crime No. 227 of 2022, under Sections 323, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station-Bilgram, District- Hardoi.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. As per prosecution story so narrated in the FIR, the present applicant has made wrong deeds with the daughter of the complainant/ informant, who is aged about eighteen years. As per the FIR, when the daughter of the complainant at about 8.00 P.M. went to defecate in the field, at that time the applicant came there and committed rape forcibly with her.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the entire prosecution story is false and concocted inasmuch as the prosecutrix is major in age and she is the consenting party with the applicant and the prosecutrix is mentally
Ganesan Vs. State represented by its Inspector of Police
Krishan Kumar Malik v. State of Haryana
Phool Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Sham Singh vs. State of Haryana
State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain
State of Orissa v. Thakara Besra
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.